tv Washington Journal CSPAN June 1, 2010 7:00am-10:00am EDT
all of these issues and that the president will be dealing with today as he returns from memorial day weekend. "usa today" has a front-page story. world of troubles for the u.s. we want to hear from you -- the israeli raid on the flotilla is one of the front page shores. the attorney general indicating justice department lawyers are examining whether there is malfeasance.
meet with president obama, the trip has been cancelled. here is the front page of "usa today." wendy will be talking later about one of the topic. they divided into three areas. the gulf coast -- "top kill" failure dashes hopes. the situation in north korea appeared -- north korea. the sinking of that ship back on march 26 that killed 42 south korean sailors has prompted south korea's government to throttle back on aid to the north and demand the u.s. back its quest for sanctions against can young ill -- kim jong-il. holding off the turnover of military power to its military
by u.s. forces, which have had a large base here since the korean war. then this other story from israel, as the sea fight provoked new tensions in the region. we begin with charles joining us from all possible, texas, democrats line. caller: thank you for c-span. internationally when it comes to foreign relations, we have nothing but troubles and domestically we have nothing but troubles. but as far as economics is concerned, because europe is kind of falling apart with the euro, things are getting better on that end for us. the dollar is kind of increasing, getting stronger, and europe is kind of declining. they think europe bought themselves time with this trillion dollar bailout, but all they did is buy themselves some time and it could get really, really bad for europe. as far as the israel thing, i was listening to the bbc world
service yesterday, and they had on one of the women, or one of the head activists, speaking to a broadcaster there and this woman, it was a clear provocation, is what it was, against the israelis. the israelis did everything in their power to get aid to gaza through other channels. they told the woman to go to a port in is route and she refused and if she did not want to deal with the israelis, they said to go to a report in egypt and they would take care of it. the egyptians, she refused, and they decided to run the blockade. we all know what happened. they asked the woman, people lost their lives -- the broadcaster of bbc asked her, don't you feel bad about this? she said, nope. host: charles, let us go back to the "usa today" piece.
he regretted the loss of life but said the soldiers have "defend themselves." little river, south carolina. what do you want to address? caller: this is real thing -- israel thing. if israel does it, it is terrible, the world ever appeared it is the media after israel. correa, the shank -- sink a ship. everybody is not up in arms over the world. we have to have a commission to see if we can have sanctions. and everybody has to steady it. the u.n., they have to study it. but here, the jump right out on israel. unbelievable. muslims are bad for the world, they want to take over and nobody wants to understand that.
host: why do i say that? caller: why do i say that. here is an example, in israel, they are just trying to be safe, keep their people from being killed. so, what are they doing? they are looking into ships that going into gaza. people in gaza are trying to kill the people in israel, but we can't stop those people from checking ships. they need to check the ships to see what they are getting killed with. host: your sentiment is reflected in "the wall street journal."
this conclusion from "the wall street journal" -- billy is joining us from north carolina. good morning to you. democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think -- more control over israel -- that will almost of the world's problems. china will do more for north korea appeared we can't go round and say that israel can do what they want and then want everyone else around the world to play by the rules. when the u.n. tells them anything, they don't do it. i've got nothing against israel. i really don't. they are an ally to us. but israel is not a part of the united states. it is not first over the
interest of us. that is where we are using our soldiers. if we are not careful, they will have us in world war iii. this is real people, the jews are great people, but only the big time ones that control all of the finances here in america and i think it is very dangerous. if you look in the hour, in the government, even the supreme court or what ever, it is disproportionate pro israel. host: the supreme court is predominantly catholic. caller: they have three is a row jews, i have nothing against jews but they are not 1% of the population. host: bp set to try the risky strategy to contain the blow. yesterday indispositions submarine robach that will try to share of a collapse 21-inch riser pipe with a razor-like
wire studded with bits of industrial diamonds. if it is achieved, officials will need at least a couple of days to position a dome like cap over the blood prevent their, which failed to show -- shut off the well when the deep water rise and will rig exploded on april 20, killing 11 workers. from "the new york daily news" is the sign of the cross commemorating the loss in the gulf coast region. the deadline is grand isle, louisiana. this year, the beach was deserted. john from arlington, virginia.
focusing on the story from "usa today" -- a world of trouble. good morning. caller: a real issue is, if turkey goes to the other side on some of these issues, this is going to be a strategic loss for the united states. quite frankly, we have a little bit to do with why the turks are moving the other way. in 2006 the israelis turned what is sent to the was a border incident into a major assault on lebanese infrastructure and has a lot. everybody thought it you let it go for a while, they could go for a while, they could defeat has blocked -- hezbollah. hezbollah was hurt but ended up stronger than ever. it 2009, gaza, hamas did not do
a lot of damage, scared a lot of people and killed a couple. then the israelis launched a massive invasion, a lot of destruction, killed maybe 1000 or 1400 people depending on what figures to go by and blockade of the place. we over here kind of had the same policy, let it go for a while, and that would be good. what happened was, the turks looked at it and the turks looked at what happened with the blockade, and they started moving in a different direction. cooperating with the isrealies, some rumors that it cooperated when they cooperate with the bombing of the nuclear plant letting them fly over turkish territory. this gaza business, i did not think people understand the raid in 2009 and of blocking it
afterwards, israel is not a little power anymore. it looks big and it does not look gentle. so i think even some of the guys on fox or pro israel, kind of understand now that the turks are moving in a different direction and if we lose turkey and to not respond somehow to this over all crisis, which means a movement toward a general settlement over there, i think we will end up having the turks, iranians, a few other people on one side and the us and one or two other arab countries on the other. host: we heard from the turkish prime minister who did call it a bloody massacre. this is the front-page of "the wall street journal." flotilla of salt spurs crisis. our conversation on line is twitter.com/c-spanwj. america is becoming a drama queen -- mike is joining us from a story,
new york. independent line. michael? caller: my ministry is ecumenical. i work with christian, jew, muslim, buddhist, for one world, not and a sense of a political thing but we don't have an old world, new world, third world, there is one world that even goes beyond our comprehension. we have to get rid of myths. i would like to see a one state solution. maybe we should have a state of an -- abraham,, where all the exist peaceably but we have toa- get rid of beth myth that israel is a democracy. it is not. host: what is it? caller: it is very much like jimmy carter said, a state of
apartheid. a gross use of our military and other funding. they are the largest recipient of foreign aid from the u.s., $3 billion a year. host: but it is a democracy. the people elect their leaders. caller: it is not a democracy if you don't have equal rights and travel and free speech and it just representation. host: what would you call that? caller: an apartheid state. there is a clear distinction where the guidelines or the lines set out have fostered a frenzy. unfortunately like a child that has been spoiled, it has just taken more and more. but the problem was not the establishment of israel, the problem was jewish people, like all other people, should have
gotten their respect. and that the conclusion of world war ii, the germans, belgians, the french, the english, the u.s., all should have said, jews can live anywhere and instead we set up like a reservation. we put a false model out there that usurps client did -- usurped land. host: you are going back to the history and clearly there is a lot deeply rooted in the situation. bush -- but would you not call is routed close ally of the is routed close ally of the u.s. -- would you not call israel a close ally of the u.s.? caller: you have to look at what one means with allied. if an ally, meaning you work in cooperation for common goals, we have to question what has happened, especially since -- i want to go back to jimmy carter and his actions of bringing
together on warsaw adopt and not the bag and -- anway sadat and menachim begen. we have seen an unraveling of that atmosphere. host: i have to stop the on that point. appreciate your perspective, this morning from the two new york tabloids, both focusing on the situation in the gulf war -- gulf coast. this is from "the new york post" -- as you can see the co-worker drenched in the oil. and the president in his news conference last week, and the poll numbers for president obama -- did you plug the hole yet, daddy? it is the president reading a book called "the secrets of effective leadership." "usa today" focusing on the world of troubles.
kathleen is joining us from athens, ohio, good morning. caller: i agree with the previous caller who was on the phone about israel, but i want to went -- mention three website since our mainstream media did not even touched this international humanitarian flotilla before there was violence. rachel madow -- cnn, nobody mentioned the flotilla when they left land flowing toward gaza. informedcomment -- if americans live the great place to get literature and other information about the situation in israel, and another web site called -- mondoweiss, his name is philip weiss, he is jewish, he writes about the issue all the time and have great discussions. but i want to mention what the
mainstream media is doing with it now. i turn on fox yesterday and i think his name is carl hammer -- host: charles krauthammer. caller: they were blaming, they call them the peaceniks, saying they were trying to cause trouble, instead of having any kind of and the fate or compassion for the deaths of those people and focusing on why that flotilla was headed toward the gaza. do you know that israel has not played by the rules, the roles they want others to play by, that they continued to expand illegal settlements since the oslo accord and our media and the gold stowed report, judge goldstone, who is jewish and a total supporter of israel based on the 1967 borders, total supporter anyway, he did that report on what went on in the
gaza and our congress people and the israeli lobby shut the goldstone report down. this guy is internationally recognized and honored, judge goldstone, and our congress people would not even read the goldstone report. host: american troops leaving haiti. the bulk of u.s. military forces will depart haiti today, leaving the u.n. forces and civilian groups to help the country rebuild its devastated capital in the wake of that january earthquake that killed several hundred thousand people. also from "the wall street journal" -- turkey, a staunch ally, leads and the outcry. this and you were saying -- -- this viewer saying --
republican line, good morning. caller: i know for a fact that -- on the oil spill, not the spill, but the busted pipes, that the oil company handling it right now, it could have been fixed the day after it happened. by simply blowing it up, and that could have been done and that is for year -- for real now, i'm serious, they could have blown up. but then they would not have gotten the oil out of it and that is the problem. they are trying to save the oil and they could have blown it up. the oiley can't capture -- caller: when it was leaking they could have blown it up and sealed it, but they could not have went back in there and gotten the oil. host: thanks for the call. looking at some of the
international headlines. this is from "the guardian." israel is accused of state terrorism. if you log onto aljazeera english website they had its perspective, the coverage. here is part of their reporting. >> under cover of darkness israeli special forces in descending as it made its way to international waters toward gaza. it was not meant to be geared the israeli raid turned deadly with soldiers opening fire with live ammunition. those injured received medical attention on board, but for others, it was simply too late. these images show the chaos and confusion that ensued in the deadly minutes that the chaos
and folded. >> area of hostility -- the london israeli forces warned the cargo vessel not to proceed toward gaza where it risked being intercepted. the military said its forces opened fire in self defense and had been attacked once they boarded the ship to commandeer it away from israel. but and aljazeera producer aboard the ship saw that activists raised a white flag and described the first few minutes. >> the organizers -- two people were confirmed killed -- have asked all the passengers to go inside. they raised the white flag, this after israel and commanders descended upon the ship in international water. host: a reporter from aljazeera. "the washington post" has this editorial.
this twitter comment -- >> is a viewer from centerville, virginia. -- is a viewer from centerville, virginia. you are on the air. go ahead. caller: everybody is calling in this morning and talking about this is a real -- israel stuff and talking about the borders down there in arizona and all that. i don't understand why the whole thing, everything people call in about, nobody knows nothing about or they get different answers or conclusions to solve
the problems. why doesn't somebody just get together, make plans, and do what needs to be done? host: "usa today" -- world of troubles for the u.s. anxiety in the gulf, tensions in korea and protest in the gaza. charlotte is joining us from all cretonne, florida. democrats line -- boca raton, florida. caller: that is the problem, that's israel doesn't stand alone. the yukon -- united states is an ally, but half an ally. if israel goes, there goes the middle east. it amazes me that people are so naive and do not understand this. turkey is a muslim nation, the middle east is a muslim, they
will stand together. against the united states. so, if the rest of the world, including europe and canada, australia, if we don't stand australia, if we don't stand with israel, we are in absolute big, big trouble. host: thanks for the call. this morning, david sang their reporting on the situation in iran -- david sanger. the headline saying iran is said to have fuel for two nuclear weapons.
that headline right above the fold. the next call is jim from illinois. -- "usa today" has the had lined the walls of troubles for the u.s. caller: this is jim burke. my view is that those arab people were sending arms and -- to hamas in those ships. and all of these liberals have always tried to ignore that and focus on what israel did wrong. what israel did right was to stop bombs, arms, guns, and ammunition from going to hamas. that is the real focus. and every liberal in this country wants to take the focus off of that and say, those poor arab muslims, when the real problem is the arab muslims. israel is our support, -- need
our support, it is our best ally. that is the most important thing to remember. they are our real ally. turkey has already turned against us and wanted to buddy up to iran, so really we should support israel 100%. host: the israeli media released a statement from government officials from jerusalem. we will let you listen in. this is with english subtitles, so our apologies to our radio audience.
the front page of "the new york daily news" i of the storm. ken is joining us from louisville, ky. caller: am i on the line? host: you sure are. go ahead. caller: the people who call with an agenda, the lady who calls every three months and gives you the lines and stories and she always says the same thing. support is a real put the kids -- those people have nothing to talk about. turkey is very hurt right now because the european union after many years of discussion decided not to let them join the european union because they are afraid of millions and millions of muslims joining the european union.
this is a very important of the. a couple of weeks ago with iran and brazil holding hands and the air in opposition to u.s. policy to iran. when we had the last war in iraq, they refused to let us use the territory. we had to go all the way around it. they are supposed to be our france. -- supposedly are friends. it used to be a good friend of israel for years, but now because they are becoming more islamist -- was a beautiful country, the people of great. change the country -- but i saw the pictures, almost all women now are being covered and they are going back.
turkey, please do something about your government. don't let them bring you back to the point of being one of those backward countries in the middle east. host: from "the new york times" -- the israeli prime minister cancelled as plans to come to washington to meet with the present. the two men did speak by phone within hours and the white house recently released an account -- the li
anne had this comment -- brad is joining us from annandale, virginia. caller: how are you this morning? i just wanted to make a couple of quick points. the situation in the middle east, it seems to me it has been a couple of thousand years, and the religious wars and everything, they will keep fighting. i do not think there is anything the united states can do to stop any of that. the situation on about the illegal immigrants, it seems to me that they are here illegally.
it seems to mean that a lot of these women who come here with their husbands, they get pregnant and they get housing allowances, they get food inmps, they get twic virginia, and it seems like the tax payers are paying. host: the front page of "roll call" -- a book that was featured on c- span's "q&a" is getting a lot of attention. "the big short" fits the bill
big time. i was just in shock, says michael lewis, as members of congress from chris dodd to dick durbin, saying it is a book that must be read. the front page of politico and also online at politico.com. the conversation on line is going on in earnest. this view were saying -- -- viewer saying -- next from fairfield, iowa. caller: good afternoon to. i had the opportunity to visit with you. we are simply in trouble and what we had is a president who is incapable and will never get out of it. we need to get rid of him and
charles joining us from springfield, massachusetts. good morning. caller: i was thinking that what is going on right now is sort of a reflection of what went on at kyoto. it seems as though america is being challenged by these emerging powers. you have the situation in north korea where we are completely reliance on the chinese. and the situation with iran, some of these shifting alliances and up having influence in afghanistan. but the thing that struck me this morning is this situation with israel. i lived there in the 1990's and
i'm interested in absolutely how polarized people are that, you know, that israel doesn't bargain in good faith, return to the 1967 borders. everyone takes sort of an line. ve tist i think a lot of is right now, i think it will be interesting to see where the israeli politics shakeout, whether people support netanyahu. but i think you could make an but i think you could make an argument that, you know, the bush administration pushed for this idea of democracy in iraq, pushed it for a solution, like having a democracy would bring about markets and positive change and so forth, and sort of
in the american style jeffersonian democrats. it just does not shake out that way. host: thanks for the call. a former ambassador wendy will join us and about 10 minutes. the house and senate will join us -- rejoined after memorial day. regulatory reform -- drafting the final bill that the white house. on the front of "usa today" the world of troubles for the u.s. this other story, in case you missed it, attorney general eric holder prepares to go to the gulf coast.
this from a viewr who was saying -- sarai joining us from tucson, arizona. good morning. "dial tone -- [dialtone] >> we would go to run from california. -- host: >> we will go to ron from california. caller: the occupation of palestine is unbelievably cold. the reason for the flotilla is because not enough food and medical supplies and supplies in general are getting through
israel to gaza to sustain the population. israel refuses to allow them to go in. they want the palestinians to buy their own goods. and the palestinians don't want to. my girlfriend just returned from four months living in the west bank. and the stories she told me are unbelievably cruel. stories where a tanker trucks would come out of israeli settlements and spray sewage water into the homes of palestinian people while they are demonstrating the destruction of their olive groves. host: is there evidence of what you are saying? caller: i have an eye witness
right here who saw this several times in the village, they would bring a truck in, they bring the truck in the that is full of -- i do not know if it is treated or untreated sewage water. it has some type of blue stuff. 10 and they spray into people's holmeses -- and they sprayed into people's houses. host: i have to tell you, i never heard of that happening. go ahead. caller: she doesn't live. the lady is implacably truthful. the other thing, steve, if i can. earlier you asked a gentleman what would you call israel if not a democracy. i would counter that by asking you, would you call apartheid south africa a democracy?
if everybody does not have the same rights and privileges? if it -- is a democracy that some people cannot drive down the same road? palestinians are not allowed down the same roads. when they go to catch a bus, israelis, they have little shelters. palestinians are not allowed to use those. they have to stand out in the rain and wait. their vehicles have to balance down dirt road off of the sides of a los superhighways that is a role created for their -- settlements, which are illegal. they are not supposed to be there. it is against international law to build a permanent settlements in occupied territory. host: another comment, and you can join the conversation on line at twitter.com/c-spanwj.
this is the cover story of the latest edition of "the national journal." the president, who traveled to chicago over the weekend, is even do was washed out, as the president told people it may not be safe because of the lightning. the story in "the washington post" -- on a state -- day of small calamities, lightning flashed and a torrent of heavy rain pelted thousands of visitors.
reports this morning, page a-3 of today's "washington post." "usa today" has a story, a world of troubles for the u.s. and up. we will take a short break. when we come back, we will turn our attention to other topics including nafta, bankruptcy, and more of the situation in north korea. it is tuesday, june 1. >> the treaty before you is an
evolution of agreements that go back to the 1970's, and particularly, a series of start agreements started in the reagan administration and continued in some form in every subsequent administration. >> watch the moments that make history, right now on line at the c-span video library. it is washington your way, every program since 1987, available free online. "inhis weekend on book tv's depth" noted feminist, author, legal scholar martha nussman, has written or contributed to more than 20 books on liberal education, ethics, sexism. join the discussion with your phone calls, e-mails, and tw eets live sunday at noon eastern. >> "washington journal"
continues. host: wendy sherman served as the state department counselor, she served under the clinton administration for north korea appeared let's begin -- north korea. let's begin with the sanctions imposed by south korea. will it work? guest: my guess is it will make everybody take a step and haws. we will certainly not go forward with the six-party talks at this point. everyone is very concerned about and nuclear weapons that we know north korea undoubtably has. i think what we need a solidarity. we need to make sure that the security council moves forward with a condemnation of what north korea has done with a loss of 46 foul lives on the freighter, a naval ship in south korea, which was sunk by the north koreans. an international investigation led by the south koreans is pretty definitive. the russians are now in seoul
looking at that material, that investigation, to be able to come on board, i hope, in the chinese were very critical to this process, also looking at the investigation to make their own judgments. host: will they joined the investigation? are they on board? guest: i think ultimately china will be on board. they never like to be the odd country out. once russia comes on board it will be more difficult for chinese. in fact, wen jiabao, the premier, was in seroul and said china will not protect a country or an actor responsible for such a thing. they gave themselves a path toward affirming the investigation south korea has led. i think we need to be a little bit patient until china gets there but i believe that the end of the day the facts are so firm and so deliver to that it will be hard for china not to, in
fact, condemned what north korea has done. host: one theory is kim jong-il supported the attack and use it as a way to prop up his son. could you elaborate? guest: i think there are several theories. that he knows after the stroke he had, that his time is not infinite on this earth, which is good for the people of north korea, so he is trying to groom his 27-year-old son who has virtually no experience, his youngest son, to take over. some people believe that he had his son actually direct the military to undertake the sinking of the frigates -- to show he is one with the military because it was a military first policy in north korea and it sees the military as the best way to secure the survival of his regime and legacy from his father down to his son.
whether in fact that happened in that is not clear. i think most believe that this was directed by kim jong-il. some people believe it was also retaliation for a naval skirmish that happened in 2009 in which a no. 3 in sailor was killed. host: the situation with israel and the gaza strip, a u.n. security council calling for an impartial investigation. guest: we hope this impartial, transparent and fair investigation, it needs to look at what the intention was of the flotilla heading toward gaza, what in fact did the israelis do, who began any of the violence that took place. i think there are a lot of facts, but the white house said, that we need to know here. it is a terrible, tragic situation for all involved. obviously for the people lost their lives, the families of
those people. i think everyone in the international community feels for the people of gaza, not so much for hamas that is governing, so to speak, gaza, but the people of gaza are suffering. humanitarian aid does get through. through. there is a process for doing that. the israelis are asserting that in fact the flotilla of meant to have a confrontation. something went horribly wrong. probably on all sides, to some extent. but this is a really tragic situation and i hope we get to the facts very quickly. i know that everyone -- the united states, israel, turkey, certainly the palestinian authority, regret the loss of life. host: the timing of this. there has been a public relationship between this president, barack obama, and benjamin netanyahu. last week rahm emanuel, white house chief of staff, meets with the israeli prime minister.
he was supposed to be here today. the trip was canceled. it is on the start of reading talks between the israelis and palestinians, which have now broken off. guest: the timing of this could not possibly be worth actually. in fact, on june 9, the head of the palestinian authority in, the president of the palestinian authority is due here to meet with president obama. i am sure that will be a tough trip. the prime minister of turkey will be here today meeting with will be here today meeting with secretary clinton, which is a preset meeting before this terrible tragic incidents. so, i think we have a lot that is going to happen in the days ahead and it is a very difficult situation. host: "the new york times" indicating iran has capacity for two nuclear bombs. guest: i tell you, if i was president obama week of this morning and saw the headlines and all swarming on top of the
gulf oil crisis, i might go back to chicago. this is very tough. "the der times" article this morning is an iaea, international atomic energy agency report that is, out that -- that has come out and basically said iran has moved forward. that the deal that turkey and brazil tried to strike with iran to get their highly enriched uranium, or low enriched uranium, out of turkey, is not sufficient. because they produced so much that even if a set sum out they would still be producing uranium that if in highly enriched would get that one or two nuclear weapons. the importance of this, though, is because of this report, it will give more weight to the security council resolution that the united states has been pushing at the u.n. ostensibly that has everyone signed onto it. so i would suspect we would see a u.n. security council sanctions resolution against
iran passed sometime in the near future. host: willett work? the sanctions have teeth? guest: it probably will not be as strong as everyone would like to do. it will have teeth and put will pressure on iran. i think we saw some of the impact of the pressure because they were willing to negotiate with turkey and brazil, they were willing to take a step forward. not enough of a step. the iaea report confirms it was not enough of a step. but the international security, both the situation of north korea and iran, have to keep pressing forward. host: with all of these issues, how do you think the world use our country and as president right now? guest: there will be a new pew global attitudes steady, not in the next few days, i think june 17 is the release date. i suspect that the data will show that the president personally is a pretty popular guide, i think he still is. acting there is probably concerned about some of the
american leadership, whether in fact we are really on top of all of the problems in the world. the president has got an extraordinary amount on his plate. i think the white house is trying to put all the pieces together to move forward. these are all very difficult. and the new national security strategy, which the president just released last week, says that our strength really begins with our economic strength, which is why we have to stay focused on our economic recovery and then use all the tools of our disposal in a multilateral fashion with america taking the lead, where appropriate, to get these problems solved. there is no silver bullet. that has to be a persistent, constant effort to try to solve the problems. host: part of the perception, fair or not, this is the president yesterday outside of chicago at a memorial day service that was cancelled due to heavy rain. he is with an umbrella telling people to have to show appeared to this picture, with everything
to this picture, with everything we are dealing, and "usa today" -- becomes emblematic? guest: i do not think any president would like to have that picture. but on the other hand, the president himself went to the microphone and said i want you to stay safe so he took what was a really terrible situation and did the best the could with it. he then returned to washington and held a public event to honor all of the soldiers and all of the families who have lost loved ones in the wars that we are fighting, have fought in the past. so took a difficult situation and did the best to cope with it. host: have you been following the gulf coast situation? guest: it is just devastating. it is the greatest economic disaster our country has ever faced. i feel terribly for the people who are losing their livelihood.
whether it is tourism, shrimping, fishing in the gulf. we are going to have this with us for many, many years to come. host: our guest is ambassador wendy sherman. jake is joining us from orlando, florida. independent line. caller: i was wondering, in the case of north korea, with the international investigation, why initially china and russia were not invited. you brought up the situation of the gaza strip. yesterday the former ambassador to the united states from israel said that hamas overthrew the government -- it was it minute by barack obama in 2008 that they were democratically elected. guest: those are two very important and difficult questions. i think the south koreans, when they did the initial investigation, brought on board some of the best expertise in
this kind of investigation that were available internationally. they now have invited in that the russians and chinese to look at the investigation, to inspect the ship themselves, to bring in the experts they would like to look at this. so, i think of the end of the day, the south koreans conduct is in a very thoughtful and delivered to process and in fact president of south korea could have really gone up with the strong emotions after 46 sailors lost their lives. he certainly expressed the deep loss of the south korean people, but he said we have to have an investigation, we have to take our time to do it a fairly. so i think he campbell this extremely well in a very difficult situation. where hamas is concerned, indeed, there was an election. you are correct about that. but, in fact, hamas has a really oprah's the people of gaza of --
really will pressed the people of gaza. it is a sponsor of terrorism. they certainly don't believe in the security and survival of israel, which is crucial to the united states and our security in the middle east. so, hamas is not a positive factor in this process. it and we all, i think, share the great concern that the hon mandatary in -- that the humanitarian needs of the people in gaza and the white house expressed the ongoing needs -- need to meet the needs of those people. host: let me begin by asking you about the diplomatic relationship between turkey and israel prior to this weekend. guest: prior to this weekend, turkey and israel had probably the strongest relationship of a muslim country to israel that existed in the united -- than the nine it states.
in the last few months there has been tension as turkey tries to come onto the world stage and position itself as a broker in a number of circumstances, including, as we discussed, with iran. so, turkey has been in a very difficult role, on one hand trying to be the broker of the irans of the world and on the other hand maintaining a relationship with israel. the flotilla that was headed toward gaza was set on the seas from istanbul from turkey with the goods to go to gaza. and it was supported by a turkish civil society group that wants to move forward to end the blockade against gaza. so, this is a very complicated now in the relationship. turkey has told israel's ambassador to leave turkey. they have demanded an investigation.
the u.n. security council early this morning agreed on a statement that called for a transparent and fair investigation of the circumstances. i think it is useful for all of us. but, this is a very difficult and tragic situation. very dangerous. host: connect the dots -- and you started to a little bit ago. but this is the piece for earlier this morning. . earlier this morning. .
iran did not have enough low, reached a uranium to undermine such a process. but now 18 months later the deal struck would allow iran to hold on to enough low, enriched uranium, that if they enriched for the they would have enough for a nuclear weapon. the deal that was struck eight months ago is no longer sufficient today given that iran has continued to enrich uranium, which is what the iaea report says this money. we're in a much more difficult position. i appreciate what they tried to do. it was a valiant effort to move this forward. unfortunately, tehran has moved on, has continued to enrich uranium and the deal struck eight months ago is no longer valid today and the iaea report
affirms that posture. host: wendy sherman worked at the state department. her area of expertise among other focuses is north korea. she is a graduate -- attended smith college, and finished at boston university. this is a message with the question -- guest: i think they're quite different situations. the cuban blockade happened at a different point in history. our cuban politics of very complicated because they are emotional, have strong domestic constituencies here in the u.s. who believe that our embargo of cuba is essential to take down the castro government. during the clinton
administration we tried to allow more humanitarian business, more remittances to go back, to allow people to go and visit were steady in an effort to help the cuban people understand there was a wider world. that everything caster was telling them was not true. the bush administration closed that capability. president obama tried to open it more, but right now we have an embargo that is part of law, was said during the clinton administration with legislation from the congress. host: our next guest is from tucson, arizona. caller: good morning. i wanted you to say -- the biggest thing i see concerning north korea and south korea, turkey, israel, america -- any country anywhere, it is that
peace takes courage. when there is miscommunication and disrespect among leaders, you have all these problems. you will have people not wanting to talk in not understanding each other's point of view. i work with politicians here in tucson who have changed the party to an opinion because they are tired of the party telling them what to do. you cannot just choose a side -- it takes courage to want to be in the battle. my question is, what advice would you give to north korea? what would you say that will make an impact on decisions? guest: i think the caller clearly does good work in tucson because engagement, listening, understanding, understanding the motives and intentions of people, what is important to them, is all part of getting, to
solving problems in diplomacy and the world. i have had occasion with secretary madeleine albright when she was secretary of state to go to north korea and meet with kim jong-il and what north korea once more than anything in the world is the survival of the regime. it is a horrible regime. north korea is now where people want to live. there is no freedom, no human rights, no prosperity. if you see an overhead map of north korea and of itself free and there's only one point of light in pyoongyang, as opposed to the thousands of lights in suffering. i tell north korea that your regime survival is dependent on your entering the international community, not on getting isolated from it. that you need to step out into
the world if you want to continue to rule, what your people to have a future. you need to join the rules and norms of the international committee. i don't think that is what jong- il once to do. he had enough plutonium for one or two nuclear-weapons. it was fissile material he had amassed during the first bush, bush senior administration. there used largely for deterrents at that number. during the bush administration he amassed enough plutonium for probably up to 10 nuclear weapons. they give some ability to sell, to use it, to test it. we are in a very difficult place with north korea. all of the countries in the region need to think about what they want northeast asia of the
future to be loved. think about that vision, and began to plan toward it. i do not think that kim jong-il would give up his nuclear weapons anytime soon. host: and there are elections under way in south korea? guest: yes, regional elections. because of the way the president has conducted the investigation his party will probably do rather well. he will probably keep the maoyor of seoul which is critical. they are aiming at hosting the g-20 in november. then in 2012 they and we have elections. china will see a succession in 2012 and it will be the 100th anniversary of the founder of the modern north korea. 2012 will be a big year and the two years from now until then
will be enormous in change taking place. host: if the ship had been american or israeli, or british, would things have been different? guest: oh, i think if the north koreans had hit an american ship we would have had a similar process we would have had an investigation, would have decided inappropriate way to retaliate, that there must be consequences. that that kind of aggression is a military action must be answered. the south korea with the international committee is trying to enter it in a way that will not escalate the situation of control. as the president said over the weekend, south korea does not fear war, but it does not want war. none of us do. host: joining us on the republican line.
caller: good morning. it is my birthday. in 54 this morning. i have never missed a vote. i voted for your boss. but i am not happy, and will not get into a lot of politics today. i want to stay on topic. i was sure that north korea sunk the south korean ship. i'm just throwing that out there. are we sure? the past as proven that what is said immediately after an event that's not always proved to be so. guest: the caller is correct. that is why the president of south korea calls for an investigation, and calls for patience to make sure it is done properly. i have seen this live from the investigative results. they're pretty compelling. i have no doubt myself that north korea did in fact sink
this ship. it was not a direct torpedo hit, but the summit wave created by the torpedo which was used -- though soininic wave of virtualy broke the ship in half and took the life of 46 sailors. so, i have no doubt with the international experts who agree with that assessment. the evidence stands up firmly. host: good morning, caller from massachusetts. caller: i want to make two comments. the first, i feel as an independent voter that we have to take two steps backward. before we take another step forward. right now we are facing world crises. we have a crisis here in the
u.s. the needs to be taken care of first. we're supposed to be leaders of the world. let's show everybody else, israelis, koreans, whatever, that we are the strong country we are supposed to be. let's take care of problems at home first, and as i said, take two steps forward before we take -- let's take two steps backwards first before we take another forward. let's get our country as strong as it used to be. i want to see the united states the number one as it always has been. let the other countries go in and solve their own problems. guest: welcome i understand the sentiment. the president's national security strategy says that our strength comes from home, comes from making sure we have a strong economy that can stand
up. but one of the things we learned through the economic crisis is that we areeall inter-connected. there is no so-called decoupling between our country's economy and the rest of the world's economy. everything that we do is connected to this interdependent world. we must start it home to make sure there is a strong economy and a vibrant political system, a strong democracy, that we are strong militarily -- indeed everything that we do here is connected to the rest of the world. when europe had its crisis just the last few weeks with greece looking at a possible default. concern over contagion spreading to the so-called pigs countries, we saw that tank our stock market. so, these things are interconnected and yes, we have to take your home base, the need to understand we have to look at a world regulatory structure
and economy. host: next, an opinion piece this morning from "the wall street journal" posing these questions with regard to the fiasco. one wonders if it would have been possible for ages to sabotage the ships before they left the ports of this incident would never have occurred. or failing that, to allow the ships to have been operable in gaza, and then to disable them so as to prevent any further trips. guest: i think they're many questions to be asked about the flotilla and its intent, why it was on board, why the choices were made. we know two things this morning. one, there was a tragic loss of life in no one can be happy about that. everyone must be terribly sad that it occurred. the second thing we know is that israelis landed on those ships and something occurred.
israelis have said they had to defend themselves, that the people on board had metal pipes, and perhaps having guns. the people on board say that israel took unacceptable action. the u.n. security council for a presidential statement has called for an investigation that is fair and transparent. aid needs to happen with deliberate speed. what is really crucial here is an intense effort by the obama administration to work with both israel and the palestinian authority to move the peace process forward, to make sure we can move humanitarian aid into gaza. to make sure the future will be different. host: i guess the word tense, the personal relationship between president obama and president netanyahu -- which word would you use?
guest: i hope it is a personal relationship evolving in a way that would allow the peace process to move forward. none of us get to choose the leaders with whom we work, or the people with whom we work. particularly when you are the president of the united states. you have to find a way forward the matter who the other person is on the other side of the table. one thing, i was at camp david and different negotiations during the clinton administration when netanyahu was prime minister during the river agreement. although he is certainly very clear about what he wants, very strong-willed, he is someone who understands what it is to make an agreement, to move forward, did reach an agreement at the
river. so even if his and the presidential politics and not exactly the same, he does understand what an agreement is about. his defense minister was the prime minister during camp david. these are two men who know what the middle east peace process is about. if they made up their minds to move toward, i believe there is a way to do so. host: welcome, nancy, from santa clara, california caller: my brother was killed during the police action of the 1960's. i heard the president say last week that he promised his daughters of vacation every six weeks. my children have not had a vacation in three years. he talks about his state night he promised his wife. my husband and i have not been able to afford a date night in two years. this president is a progressive, to the left of liberals. all of his bowling to the
dictators around the world when he first came in has borne no fruit. no one respects us anymore and no one believes in as president. guest: well, i appreciate the caller's point of view. i am very, very sorry that you lost your brother during the korean war. that is something that is impossible to recover from. i also understand and hear the tough economic situation of many families are in. your family is clearly hurting pretty bad. i know that the president believes that is his first job, to ensure jobs for american families, and it is very hard to see beyond our shores until that need is met in people's day-to- day lives. i know he is trying to focus on
getting that done. i hope for the color that progress happens for you personally, and for all americans very soon. host: lori, on the democrats' line. caller: i have seen you before on c-span, and this wendy sherman. i have always appreciated you. i hope that you let a true investigation by the united nations occur. i am so sorry that we as the u.s. are really an accomplice to letting the open-air prison situation occur that is the gaza strip. it makes me so sad that we let this happen. they had it true, democratic election in gaza. because we did not like the outcome we went along with the
starvation of those people. it makes me sad that we are an accomplice. host: thank you. guest: thank you for your comments. i don't think there is anyone in the world, including the president of the u.s., who was not harper combined the humanitarian needs of the people in gaza, the most densely populated piece of land on the face of death. people there have suffered for quite a long time. humanitarian aid is allowed, but not to the extent many believe it needs to be. president last night said he wants to continue to work to ensure the people of gaza get their needs met. i hope we sort out the situation very quickly. i hope there is an intensity about moving forward with the middle east peace process, because no interim solution will
solve the problem until the whole problem is solved. host: a story this morning in " usa today" about the role of women as the peace conference gets under way. u.s. lawmakers said "they want women's rights reserved." personally, laura bush has been pushing for equal rights for women. michele obama has also talked about it. what is it about afghan society that has not allowed women to rise? guest: with the resurgence of the taliban in off, we see greater portion of women's rights. we want to make sure that the karzai government moves forward. that when they meet in the peace
conference, that they have women's rights, women's representatives. one of the most scary expenses i have ever had was when i was privileged to be with secretary albrecht in a refugee camp overseas, meeting with women who had been, who had fled afghanistan for pakistan because of the taliban. women who have been teachers, lawyers, nurses, who were no longer able to live their lives. young girls who had been raped, stuffed in closets. absolutely heartbreaking. so, the president, the first lady, secretary clinton who has the message there for women's rights around the world -- it is crucial to move afford to make sure that women's rights remain paramount. we also know that development moves forward in the countries
when women aren't gauged, involved either at the agricultural, industrial, governmental level in helping to build economies. host: so, they are going backwards? guest: there is a concern that we are because of the resurgence of the taliban. we need to do continue to make it clear that women's rights are a very crucial element and the development of any country. host: wendy sherman who has worked for two secretaries of state, warren christopher and madeleine albright, a graduate of boston university, earned her master's at the university of maryland. good morning, donna. caller: i like to say a couple of things. i think the country is a mess. the whole world. we talk about plutonium, nuclear-weapons. it is aamess.
it is a shame that the country has come to all this. i would like to know, is there anything [inaudible] can do about it? to be honest, i don't think there is. host: thank you. his comment in this twitter, might be tied together. -- his, and this comment from twitter might be tied together. guest: welcome i don't quite agree with the twitter comment. i do think that obama came with experience, as a state legislator and senator. being a legislator means you're close to the people and understand what their day-to-day lives are. people who work in state government probably have a very acute sense of people's day-to- day lives and the needs of families. i think he was close to the ground, and that is important
when you are president. you cannot forget who you are trying to help and what people's lives are like. that said, i do not disagree with the caller that the world is a mess. that is not america is doing alone. the world is a complicated place. the pressures of change, the pace of change is enormous. it is often hard for governments to cope with that. and not to give political here, but the bush administration took a certain stance toward the world. so, when president obama arrived, the respect of the u.s. in the world was at its lowest ever. president obama had to begin at a very tough place. he has improved the standing of the u.s. and the world. the polling data tells us that. but he has a lot of problems to deal with. he came in on the eve of the most severe economic crisis since the great depression.
we know are moving out of the crisis. i give him a lot of credit for making sure we did not fall into a depression. but the climate now is a tough one. host: "usa today" it said the tensions in north and south korea, and other crises more trouble for the u.s. might joins us on the line. -- mike. caller: madame ambassador, i wanted to touch on a few points. the north korea situation under the first president bush, they were trying to put the material on the black market. the solution was to give them the technology for nuclear power. they used seals on the technology as the guarantee that the north koreans would not
enrich uranium. as far as the gaza strip is concerned, over 7000 rockets have been fired from gaza by hamas into southern israel. i'm not sure that has been mentioned. as far as this flotilla from turkey, no trips to the permit should have seen this coming. they launched about one week ago. this is a public-relations disaster for israel, and therefore for us. guest: this is a caller who knows a great deal. let me begin with north korea. during the clinton administration because of the agreed framework which was done in 1994, north korea produced no additional plutonium. when president clinton came into office north korea has enough plutonium for one or two nuclear
weapons which been produced on first president bush's watch. during the eight years of the clinton administration no more plutonium was developed in north korea. i take that as a very positive step. we were in the midst of negotiations to move forward on both long-range missiles and nuclear program. president bush came in, took a very different approach. as a result, north korea produced enough for between eight and 10 more weapons. that said, we are here and we have to do with it. it is a very tough problem. i think that your point thatgaza launching rockets into israel is crucial. the security of israel is constantly at risk. it is why we're moving forward intensely on the peace process. i think it is crucial because there is no interim solution.
you really have to get to the end of this terrible problem. we have to get to a two-state solution and ensure the security of israel into the future. host: we welcome mike from oregon. caller: good morning. it is a privilege to speak with you, madam. my question is about this is really thing with the flotilla. there were over 12 people killed? when the israelis boarded the ships. really, this is as abhorrent. it boggles my mind. the day the palestinian woman can send her family out into the world to do whatever they wish in their daily life and daily pursuits, and in return
unfettered -- to live like the rest of the world, like the rest of us in the u.s. would like to see families proceed, is the day you will not see any problems. but that is not happening. basically we have a [unintelligible] it is ironic that we find israelis and the role. -- in the role. i have some jewish friends. i have known to many jewish people to say i have anything [unintelligible] it is sad, extremely sad. host: like you are referring to the concentration camps? caller: yes, and we are seeing shades of that.
i'm just drawing a comparison. guest: a big to differ with a collar on his calling gaza that concentration camp. i think it undermines the reality of history and what happened during nazi germany. that said, no one can be happy with the situation, can think that the suffering of the people in gaza is something anyone wants to see. the suffering needs to end. the flow of humanitarian aid needs to be insured, but most importantly, we need to get to a two-state solution. an interim solution is not sufficient to ensure the future that the caller wants for the palestinians.
but the future must be a future where palestinian families can go about their lives, but israel can be secure for all time. host: comments from the viewer on the twitter page. israel to the u.s. would north korea is to china -- a radical nuclear armed nation whose fate is tied to the goals of their surrogates. guest: i beg to differ it deeply. i think there is no comparison. israel is a strong democracy. in fact, people get to speak their minds. there was an editorial this morning saying that israel needs to look at itself on the flotilla situation. in north korea there are no human rights, and a freedom of the press, the democracy, no international relationships. it is a failed dictatorship. israel is a vibrant democracy. the security of israel is also
important to america. we need to ensure the future for palestinian people and ensure the security of israel. host: so, finally, what happens next in terms of sanctions and what the party of six will do? guest: we need to make sure we have international solidarity. making sure there are additional sanctions on north korea. we need to press forward for north korea, china been a crucial element in that. we need to think about a new future and vision for north korea. it is difficult, but we must stay focused on it. where the israel/palestinian situation is concerned, we need to move towards a robust process to ensure the security of israel, and the suffering of the palestinian and israeli people. host: does this now move to the
un for an impartial investigation? guest: that was called for in our resolution and agreed to in the early morning today. i think it will move forward. host: wendy sherman, on all these issues, they keep for your perspective. we will take a short break. when we return we will turn our attention to nafta. roundtable discussion, coming up. is bankruptcy on the rise? what does the law currently state? this is the first day of june. here is a news update. >> good morning. in the headlines, the white house energy and global warming adviser carol will be interviewed on this morning's show so she does not want to guess the prospects for success
when the beach resident to use a contemning cap to control the gulf coast oil spill. bp may attempt another temporary fix. bp says cost for this bill have reached $990 million. shares in the company had been plunging in london. meanwhile, stock futures are tumbling after that enough fell to a new four-year low. two pakistani intelligence officials are offering more details on the death of a top al qaeda figure, saying that the qaeda figure, saying that the man was killed and a u.s. missile strike may 21 in the north waziristan trouble area, and al qaeda itself confirms that the third ranking official was killed along with members of his family. finally, the 40-year old son of the former abc anger ted koppel was found dead in a new york city apartment. the cause of death has not yet
been determined. now "washington journal" continues. host: we want to welcome todd tucker, the research director with the global trade watch. our topic is nafta. and also daniel griswold of the cato institute. what impact do you think that nafta will have on the u.s. economy? guest: it has been in effect for 15 years. i think the impact has been positive. more importantly not only on the economy, but on foreign policy. the u.s. is 17 times larger than mexico. low. it has been a foreign policy success with mexico and canada. it has built bonds of friendship. mexico is a different country than 25 years ago. it has a multi-party democracy. they are on the road to
modernization. it has been a modest success. host: todd tucker, is it working? guest: agreements of nafta combined with the world trade organization which is global, you can see that the u.s. has said burgeoning trade deficits and a loss of 5000 -- 5 million manufacturing jobs. a significant chunk of it is due to nafta and. the real purpose of agreements like nafta and to some extent the world trade organization is to make the world safer for multi-national corporations and give them enhanced rights in developing countries, to challenge and firemen to policies and other public interest laws. host: in 2008 $1.10 trillion in u.s. goods and services between the u.s. and nafta partners -- about $480 billion in exports
compared to 2009. guest: of course, the recession had a lot to do with those numbers. over the history of nafta our trade has grown faster with nafta partners then overall. the agreement was never going to cure the trade deficit. imports are a great blessing to low and middle-income families. the first five or six years after the passage of nafta were some of the best in our economy sister. we added half a million manufacturing jobs. the output was up 30%. the recent troubles have more to do with the recession and business cycles. it was not just about corporations. our investment in mexico has been a matter -- a modest $2 billion in masako.
the giant sucking sound that ross perot predicted never happened. nafta has been good for the u.s. and for foreign policy. host: what about jobs? guest: it never would have had an effect on the unemployment rate. it has created better jobs, better paying jobs, higher level jobs. yes, some jobs have moved to mexico and other countries, but they tend to be the lower- paying manufacturing jobs. nafta has helped us to move up modestly. it has been great for mexico. host: do you agree? guest: the real factor is that when nafta was passed the members of congress voted for, were promised, that we would have greater export and an increasing trade surplus with
mexico that would create hundreds of thousands of jobs. we have seen a bilateral deficits grow and jobs lost along with that instead. it would be nice if we could agree now that there was no such promise, but these promises were made. it has not worked out. now we're talking about having enough-style agreements with tiny countries like panama. what is the possible job creation reason for doing an agreement with panama? it is more about protecting u.s. companies with subsidiaries there who want to take advantage of the deregulation there. host: take ford motors or general motors where parts of the countries are made in canada, shipped to the u.s., and then we ship our cars to canada for sales there. guest: yes, and there is nothing
wrong with increased trade. host: doesn't it to create more jobs? guest: certainly. the debate when it comes to trade agreements is trade under white rule stacks whether the best rules govern global economy. host: where would you draw line on these rules? guest: these trade agreements have credit rules that benefit the u.s. -- let's not demonize nafta. in this recession something that did not happen is we did not engage in a kind of 1930's protectionism that was so destruction ism. destructive. let's not decrease true. canada and mexico are the north
1 and #two export markets for most states. canada is the number one export market for many states. 280,000 jobs depend on exports. let's not demonize trade with our closest neighbors. host: our topic is nafta. our two guests, todd tucker and daniel griswold. susan joins us from florida. caller: to the gentleman from the cato institute, could you please tell me to find your organization? guest: yes, it is funded entirely by private individuals.
they share our belief and limited government, free markets. most come in the form of checks of $100.500 dollars. we get no support from governments. we are independent and non- partisan. host: has any nation become more prosperous without free trade? guest: it is hard to find. some of the poorest and most dangerous nations like north korea are isolated from the global economy. the trade is not the only part, but it is an important part of development. host: this is your is saying that nafta has killed off, have to kill off the manufacturing base.
guest: the promise was that would be a great boon to the manufacturing base. it has not been the case. the attitude across the country has a strong feeling that nafta has had a detrimental impact. guest: let's not let the perfect the enemy of the good. we're manufacturing more today than before nafta was passed. we have a strong manufacturing base and a strong agricultural sector. but we have gotten more efficient. u.s. workers are manufacturing more stuff than 15 years ago. host: the two organizations represented here are the global trade watch and the cato institute. caller: good morning. on the nafta thing, i feel that
nafta is bad for the u.s. ever since it began all the manufacturing jobs have disappeared. most of the jobs that i now see our lower-paying. at one time we bring crasher everything here and had high- paying jobs. i was last down in mexico 1968 and the last time i was down there i was blown away at how many american companies like chevrolet and ford motors, washing machines companies now, all these american flags flying -- all these companies used to manufacture in the u.s. ever since bill clinton passed this as a guarantee to better
jobs, there are not. the u.s. itself is becoming a third world country. host: anthony, thanks for the call. if not nafta, then what? guest: there are any number of alternatives. the majority of house democrats have signed onto a bipartisan bill, the trade act. it would better balance manufacturing job creation, environmental concerns, and other public interest concerns. it would bounce them with a worthy goal of export expansion. there are many alternatives on the table. host: we are joined from middletown, new jersey. guescaller: nafta is part of the problem. but we have the most insane trade arrangement. i don't know what the gentleman from the cato institute is talking about as far as
exporting manufacturing goods except for products of destruction, but the only thing we produce now is making money from other people's money. it protects large corporations and their bottom line, but it has not created or sustained jobs. the most successful corporations top to bottom have gone overseas. hershey's now says they have to manufacture in china. i work in the fashion industry for years. when we imported, it was accessories. when we imported leathers that we did not make your it was lowered and its tariff than something we made up to of cotton. we protected the manufacturing base as part of our economy.
guest: it is on her mind that somehow naphtha has decimated the u.s. many fashion. we recently had a book at the cato institute -- here are some basic facts. we are manufacturing about 30% more than we were when nafta passed in terms of volume. billions of pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, automobiles. we still produce up to 10 million per year. possible acivil aircraft, heavy appliances. we remain a manufacturing hub. we are the world's north 1 manufacturing place in terms of value, but there are 5 million fewer jobs. nafta has helped us to move up the value chain. we are producing fewer shirts
and shoes, but those jobs did not pay the will. we're producing more pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, and higher and good for the workers are more productive and get better pay. host: we are not making any clothing in the u.s. to speak of guest: we're making some, but imports the majority, which means lower prices for consumers. host: in 2009 the most recent numbers, we exported about $204 billion to canada, and about $130 billion to mexico, compared to imports of $225 billion from canada, and $176 billion from mexico. guest: yes, so if you are obsessed with exporting as much as you can and importing as little as you can, then you are upset.
i think that imports are good for those who spend the highest amount of their budget on basic things like clothing. the progressives are picking the pockets of the poorest americans. one reason that hershey is looking abroad is because of our sugar quotas that make them pay two times or more in tariffs. host: charles is joining us from charlotte, north carolina. caller: good morning. as far as the balance of trade is concerned, if we subtract what we pay each of those two countries for oil, what is the balance of trade? host: todd tucker? guest: i don't know the exact answer, but he makes a good point.
a large part of that is energy. our two nafta partners are one of two of the most important sources of energy for the u.s. we should think of that the next time we think of picking a trade fight or reopening nafta for negotiation. i think it would be a huge mistake. it is one thing that the trade act todd mentioned would do, putting all these trade agreements on the table. host: this year says the problem is that there are so many fewer good paying blue-collar jobs. guest: that is right. when he said that the loss of 5 million jobs had only to do with union workers is pretty offensive to people. this is promoting the wrong kind of discussion. we should be talking about
creating and austrian industries of the future, greeting bring jobs here at home. the problem with many of these trade agreements is it encourages policy makers to think in terms of the lowest common denominator. what can we do without potentially upset in this in saying a tangle of rules? people really want to discuss how to create millions of jobs, not just celebrate the few jobs that have not yet been outsourced. host: our guest is todd tucker from the global trade watch organization and daniel griswold from the kit you institute. caller: mr. daniel griswold, it sounds like you want the responsibility of the u.s. to help the mexican economy to grow and prosper. you said earlier that all these
nafta things of help the mexican economy. you said it helps lower and middle income class people in america. i was wondering if you consider yourself low or middle-income class? how much do you make a year, sir? guest: let me assure you that i'm pretty solidly middle-class in northern virginia where i live. i just look at the numbers. it has been good for mexico, for the u.s. let's not look at the past. what sort of jobs will we create for the generation coming up? we need to face the reality that we are no longer primarily an agricultural nation, no longer and manufacturing nation. we're basically the middle- class, service sector nation. since nafta passed, two-thirds
of the new jobs added have been in service sectors were the average pay is higher than in manufacturing. we have not been swapping out high-paying manufacturing jobs for low-paying service jobs. the economy of today and tomorrow is primarily a service economy and information and technology economy. we need to prepare for the future. host: daniel griswold is with the cato institute. he earned his master's from the london school of economics and is the author of "mad about trade." todd tucker is a graduate of george washington university, studied at cambridge in england and is the author of a booklet the rise and fall of fast track
trade economy." caller: i was just curious. i wonder if either of you have registered in but, "employment, interest, and money/" it is in reference to the need for the consumer. it is an allegory. everyone takes it into their head and leaves the country. henceforth nafta has looked as without a consumer and it is really causing a lot of damage. i'm nervous, and i will let it go at that. guest: i think the promise of good economic policy addresses the kind of concerns you're raising. does it help to boost purchasing power, real wages, produce equality? we have seen under the current policy those issues have not been addressed the way they should have been.
the promises by nafta proponents have not panned out. guest: i see it quite differently. free trade is about the consumer's interests. it is about bringing vigorous competition. trade is the anti-trust policy. without it we are left at the mercy of domestic monopolies. it is ironic that so-called consumer organizations are coming down on the side of monopoly interests like the sugar producers who like to charge two and three times that of world prices. i have read the book. i think we should get rid of the remaining trade barriers which would be a tax cut for low and middle income americans who are paying high tariffs on the food and clothing they buy. free trade is done more to help struggling families in difficult
times than any stimulus program from washington. host: should we have higher tariffs for trade coming in from china? guest: we should be able to decide which industries we want to see as part of the american future. a policy with those goals, its purchases locally, gives incentives for local production -- which should be able to do that. a trade agreement should not get in the way. host: there is a robust argument on our twitter page. you can go to any wal-mart and most of the products are made in china or outside the u.s. -- the prices are low, but they're not made here in the u.s. guest: who was shopping at wal- mart? if todd opens the door to trade barriers on any industry who
says they are strategic, about three-quarters, it will mean higher prices for consumers. especially higher prices for low and middle-income families who depend on shopping at a big box retailer to make ends meet. imports go up in the fall because of all the stuff under the christmas tree. host: have the unions given the average american's a more livable wage? guest: i do not think so. i think unfortunately unions are not playing a constructive role. i cannot say all unions, but one of them is stand up for higher trade barriers would allow -- which for slow and middling come citizens to pay for higher prices. host: what about the thought of
letting the marketplace play this through? guest: as a representative of a consumer group, the reason we are involved in the fight is not about the debate on prices. it has been about consumer safety. looking at the safety of products coming into the country. looking at what type of regulatory regime we are allowed to have to ensure safety of those products without being subject to trade disputes. that is why did the consumer interest is not only about low- price. it is certainly about higher wages and also about consumer safety. guest: if it were all about consumer safety we would not be debating trade. our trade agreements allow us to have whatever safety regulations we think necessary. but they have to be non- discriminatory. we cannot have a lower set for
domestic and hire one for foreign producers. american consumers have been poisoned by beef from nebraska and peanut butter from georgia. these trade agreements give is the mechanism to hold foreign governments accountable. guest: it is not only about non- discrimination. if it were, we would not be here. the problem with nafta and wto is they also set limits on what type of non-discriminatory regulation we can have. if it were only about the import sit the regime, you are right that the door of us would be here. guest: it is an excuse for protectionism. host: a message from twitter. caller: hello. mr. todd was correct when he
said we're making the world safer for international corporations. we have 14 active trade agreements, and a trade deficit with every one of them. when you talk about the lower paying jobs, those with jobs that created the middle class in america where people could have a secure job. we have the biggest export -- exporting industry to china. we have made china the powerhouse of the world. i guess the greatest cosmic joke for those of us living in texas is that our border patrol uniforms are made in mexico. guest: certainly, i think the concern about what has been the net impact of trade agreements is a valuable. if you look at the average over the past three years with the 14 partnership mentioned, we have had a deficit with those countries. . . .
it gives us a level playing field that the politicians say they want. i say we should pass the trade agreements on the shelf with panama, colombia, and south korea, and we should negotiate more. the is -- these have been good for american workers and consumers. host: pot took represents global trade watch -- the watch todd tucker represents a global trade watch. daniel griswold is also a specialist on this topic cou. caller: mr. griswold, you mentioned pharmaceutical companies. don't you know that a pharmaceutical companies have been bought up by foreign countries? also, almost everything i use in daily -- in the morning when i
eat my food, they are from chile. even the dead of loss i use is from ireland. -- even that dental floss i use is from ireland. the only time i like to eat those with and candies and other rock and is -- ribbon candies and rock candies, they are made in mexico, canada we hardly produce anything anymore. and of course, it all started with motels and hotels quite a number of years back. i don't even think we own our own of anything anymore. sure, it looks like they are run by our own people, but america has been bought out. wake up. guest: i would just say that foreign investment is a good
thing. we are better off because foreigners want to invest in the u.s. economy. there are over 5 million americans who work for foreign- owned companies and those jobs pay an average of 30% more than the average wage. assets -- companies are still overwhelmingly owned by americans. it is a good thing when foreigners want to invest in the u.s. a third of our automobile workers in the united states work for foreign-owned affiliates. this is one reason why the import-export picture seems a little skewed. the kinds of things we import are used for consumer goods. just ask yourself where you and your family would be if you add to by mid-and-usa goods. -- if you had to be why made-in- usa could spread the things that we export tend to be that we export tend to be exports, engines, and we remain in export our horse -- an export
powerhouse. we are the no. 1 manufacturer in terms of the value added it is a different, more valuable mix of goods than we were producing 20 or 30 years ago. host: would be as what he calls the irony -- pennsylvania, democrats' line. caller: good morning. hello. mr. griswold, i have a statement to make, and then a question to you truly in my opinion underestimate the intelligence and ability of the american public at large. we understand what is going on. i'm originally from binghamton, new york. in early 1990, ibm laid-off 30,000 people. another company laid off 20,000 people. within a year, ge laid-off a 15,000 people. that city is devastated, as are many other cities around the
northeast and north midlantic states. it is insulting for us for you to sit there and say that corporations were not the backbone of the middle class of this country. that is what made the middle- class. it is insulting to us. please understand that cities and people have been devastated. my father did not belong to a union. my question for you is this, please -- you talk about service industries will replace these manufacturing jobs. please indicate which service industries you are referring to. thank you. host: we will have an griswald's response, but todd tucker, do you want to comment? guest: let's put this in context president obama promised to double exports over the next five years that would create 2 million jobs. why are talking about agreements
with countries like panama? why are we talking about a free- trade agreement model that has led to loss of manufacturing jobs and rising deficits? it is simply inappropriate. and what you are saying, americans are demanding that the president and their policymakers articulate a vision of the future which does not look like what we have experienced over the last several decades of the devastated communities and lost jobs. guest: i will just say to the color that you will not add up my fan club in new york city. but i will say this -- u.s. corporations have struggled for a lot of reasons, and another grit co., eastman kodak, his laid off 30,000 workers -- another great co., eastman kodak, as that of 30,000 workers, and it has to do with digital cameras. would you think of a politician who said that we need to ban the sale of -- what would you think
of a politician, said that we need to ban the sale of digital cameras to save jobs at kodak? you would say they are crazy. yet the logic behind trade barriers is the same faulty logic. ask people where they work. the vast majority of work in the service sector -- health care, education, information servicc, business and professional services. of those jobs form the backbone of the american middle class. we will not go back to the days of the 1950's where you could just have high school the grey and work for a manufacturing -- have a high school degree and work for a manufacturing company for the rest of your life. it is a cruel hoax to say that if you tinker with nafta, you will restore jobs in youngstown, ohio. host: twitter comment --
guest: you know, the myth of these agreements is that date or present a free market. even dad would admit that a lot of the rules in -- dan would admit that a lot the rules go against the free market. what these agreements do is set rules. it is not anything about freeing the market. it is just a different set of rules to benefit a different set of interests. host: charlotte, north carolina, is where the next caller comes from. caller: thank you. mr. tucker, thank you for defending our manufacturing jobs. mr. griswold, i am a republican. i graduated from the university of massachusetts.
we don't have no more manufacturing jobs. for example, you just said shoes. nike has an initiative that produces on average for $50. if you are on this television station defending nafta, you are defending the wrong stuff, sir. they are affecting master's degrees, bachelor's degrees, and low-wage folks. [unintelligible] we are losing our jobs by the thousands and millions. and we are not producing nothing. guest: again, i just politely disagree. we are producing lots of stuff. we remain number one in manufacturing in terms of the value added, which is the best measure but let's not be
nostalgic about the pre- announced that era. -- pre-nafta era. this is a long-term structural change in the u.s. economy did yes, it is difficult for workers who have lost their jobs because of trade. but for every worker that is lost their jobs because of trade, there are 30 who have lost jobs not because of trade. so i have said that the for every person who has lost their jobs, but -- let's but symp -- sympathy for every person who was lost their jobs, but it is not the primary source of job loss. host: top experts between the u.s. and nafta partners is
broken down in terms of industries, including manufacturing, agriculture, and plastic. we listen to francis from dallas, texas. caller: listening to these two gentlemen, i come to the opinion that they are imported, both of them, were educated otherwise, and we need people who were born and educated in this country, in the grass roots, to put forth ideas for this country. and also, all of the blue collar workers are not union workers. i think that the problem our i think that the problem our president has is that he thinks all middle-class blue-collar workers belong to unions. they don't. in my opinion, the state where they have had the biggest problem, or wher -- where they
have the biggest problem are where they have the largest unions. guest: i think unions have had a tremendous contribution to helping build the middle class and address inequality and raise wages for workers across manufacturing and other industries. i am a union member and i think that outside of manufacturing, unions have a role to play. i would respectfully disagree that unions have not contributed. again, what we're talking about today is trade agreement and the impact agreements like nafta when inequality -- on inequality and wages. the results have not been encouraging their. host: an e-mail -- "senator obama said he would do something about nafta out. does that went by the wayside." guest: he really just made a
tremendous break from what we saw during democratic and republican and ministrations in the past a lot of folks are waiting to see what his trading agenda will look like. certainly there are the issues on the top of the list -- health care, financial reform, other matters. but i think that president obama will see over the next two years at clear articulation of what type of trade policy he will pursue. for instance, the trans-pacific partnership, an asian and latin america agreement. he has a crystal, a golden opportunity to implement the labor and environmental consumer protection vision that he campaigned upon. host: how does youngstown or detroit or binghamton, the towns that have been hit hard, whether it is nafta or other factors -- many of these communities have been decimated over the last 20 years. how do they come back?
guest: first, we need to recognize that was not nafta. these communities have been struggling for several decades. to say that if we tinker with nafta there will be an industrial renaissance is just a cruel hoax. the president's basic demagoguery on the campaign trail against trade ran into the reality of running this nation. you cannot serve the interests of the u.s. economy. -- you cannot serve the interests of the u.s. economy by raising trade barriers. it will complicate our relations with other countries. mexico and canada are too close with neighbors, -- are two close neighbors, closed for a policy neighbors do you want to start your administration by picking a gratuitous trade fight with them? does it serve the national interest? does it serve one or two or
three narrow economic sectors? unionized workers and the private sector are less than 8% of workers. 80 percent of workers were in the service sector. how about a trade policy that benefits them? that's not have the tail wagging the dog on trade policy -- let's not have the tail wagging the dog on trade policy. the bottom line is that we need freer trade. free trade is fair trade. host: daniel griswold cato institute, todd tucker with global trade watch, thanks for much to both of you. please come back again. another big primary next tuesday. later, out our program will turn to bankruptcy and what it means for consumers and businesses. first, a news update from seized and radio. -- from at c-span2 radio. >> president obama and all this first meeting with the cochairs of the independent commission
will investigate the oil spill in the gulf of mexico. he will meet with bob grant, former democratic senator, and william reilly, former head of the environmental protection agency did the inquiries will range from the causes of this bill to the safety of offshore drilling and d -- the reasonable range from the causes of the spill to the city of offshore drilling. another approach is on its way to challenge is rail's home -- blockade.gaza nine people died in the commando raid on a flotilla of boats carrying activists. the freelin aof gaza movement says there will be another vessel carrying passengers.
a hearing takes place this morning in a texas court room for the army psychiatrist accused of killing 13 people in a shooting rampage last year at fort hood prosecutors have not announced yet if they will seek the death penalty against nidal hasan. his lawyer is expected to seek a delay at today's hearing at which mr. hasan is not expected to speak. investors fret that europe's shaky finances could undermine the global economic recovery. analysts say that investors of not been convinced that the crisis will end anytime soon. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. "washington journal" continues. host: primary day in alabama, mississippi, and new mexico.
what are the races you are focusing on? guest: you want to look at the republican primaries going on in two different states -- alabama, and mexico, mississippi. one big race to watch is the alabama governor's race. you have a crowded gop primary. it is the seat and bob riley is going to be vacating. he is not eligible because of term limits. he is a republican bid in the democratic race, you have -- he is a republican. in the democratic race, you have in the democratic race, you have artur davis, a congressman. and you have a cordesman who switched parties and december -- congressman who switched parties in december and became a republican after being a democrat. host: some familiar names, including in new mexico, the son of the former senator pete
domenici. guest: [no audio] it is interesting -- i think that pete domenici, a junior, is running ain the republican gubernatorial primary but has gubernatorial primary but has not been able to pick up steam. many people think that the county district attorney will run away with the republican primary victory today. host: alabama and mississippi are along the gulf coast, as we continue to monitor the situation in that part of the country, what impact do you think the bp oil spill will have in these statewide races, if any? guest: it is hard to say, but one thing you want to look at is turnout. looking at that crisis, coming after the three-day holiday weekend, and what it could mean for turn out, how much interest as there, what does it mean for
these primary states, it is hard to said. a lot of people are expecting low turnout in these states. host: we have seen in elections in massachusetts and pennsylvania and kentucky, the change election bid is not whether you are d or r, but whether you are in common, that could put you in trouble. could put you in trouble. -- whether you are incumbent, that could put you in trouble. guest: parker griffith is facing a very difficult fight. rivals up and running strong races against griffith, and he could be forced into a runoff in july might not meet the 50%
threshold tonight. that is the case, there is a possibility that someone else could get 50% and foust griffith. you look at a -- and oust griffith. you look at a city councilman who is facing a primary, nrcc- favored last year. she is facing a businessman named rick borrower, a tea party favor. -- rick barber, a tea party favorite. in the first district, the seat there is being challenged by a business woman, angela mcglowan, who has also been a fox news host.
host: as alabama at elected a democratic governor in recent memory? guest: not that i can recall, but it is interesting, if you look at the democratic primary race, artur davis, the race he is running, he has spurned the african-american, democratic power structure there, and is running the progressive-minded campaign. a lot of the african-american higher officials are upset at artur davis for spurning them and in their view focusing on others. host: haley barbour, a longtime washington, d.c. lobbyist, republican national committee chair and republican governor of that state, what impact does he have on the primary there? >> you mean the congressional
primary? host: yes. guest: it is hard to say. the question is whether the establishment favorite will pick up the 50% he needs to face off against travis childress in the general election. if not, they will have to go to a primary. a runoff, rather, in june. but the question really is whether or not he is going to be able to take what he needs. host: alex isenstadt, following the primaries and alabama, mississippi, and new mexico, thank you for being with us on c-span. samuel gerdano is joining us, the head of the american bankruptcy institute. thank you for being with us.
guest: consumers are facing increasing problems, from high debt loads, and they are in a situation today as a matter of the housing crisis. homeowners are, in many respects, under water on their mortgages and zero more on a home that it is worth. that makes it difficult to make the mortgage payment, makes it difficult to tap into home equity's, to use that money to repay other debts, and also under employment problems. employment is high in many states, double digits. people have problems meeting their obligations. when they do, they consider equity as of way out. -- they consider bankruptcy as a way out. host: what kind of timetable to you look at as a way to get back into the housing market with a
good credit rating? guest: it depends. there are 1.7 million projected bankruptcy is this year, and every case has its own story. chapter 7, the debt or is that go from most unsecured obligations that are not secured by property. the law promises a fresh economic start. in chapter 13, the debtor pays some of the debt pursuant to the repayment plan by the court. that takes anywhere from three to five years. after that, the individual is generally able to re-enter the credit market place. we are an economy, for better or worse, that runs on consumer credit, so access to affordable
credit is very important to exist in our society. but it does take time. people have been through a bankruptcy typically have problems accessing the kind of affordable credit that is important to our being on -- in to carrying on in our economy. individuals, as i said, have two basic options -- chapter 7 bankruptcy, chapter 13. businesses typically are either eligible for restructuring under chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, which tends to be more complicated and costly than the consumer bankruptcy. for those who cannot find any financing to rehabilitate themselves in the chapter 11
process, they, too, can go through chapter 7, where the assets of the cut are liquidated and the company goes out of business -- the assets of the company are liquidated and the company goes out of business. in 2005, congress did it change the law and made it more expensive for bankruptcy. they created more procedural hurdles for individuals seeking to extinguish their debts. at first filings -- at first, filings did decline. host: in 2005, there were an estimated 2 million bankruptcy filings, compared to 2009, about 1.4 million of the consumer filings. you can see an increase by over 1000 in the business filings, or just under 1000. guest: initially, filings went down, because consumers in particular rushed to take advantage of what was formally a more toward-friendly statute.
-- a more debtor-friendly statute. since then, filings fell off dramatically. but since then they have increased steadily. this year we are projecting a 1.7 million filings by the year- end, which would be the second highest total ever, notwithstanding the spike here. congress tried to reduce the number of bankruptcies, tried to encourage more people to repay debts through chapter 15. that really has not worked, mostly because the laws of economic gravity are more powerful than the laws of congress. people who cannot afford to meet obligations will look to bankruptcy. host: if you have gone through bankruptcy, we will especially enjoyed hearing from you as well, your stories and your experiences and your questions for samuel gerdano.
you get a -- you can also send us an e-mail. as the stigma of bankruptcy got away in today's economy? guest: it is hard to measure something like this did not. -- something like stigma. certainly the standards have involved. there is less about stigma today than there might have been two or three generations ago. americans, as we have seen millions of filings every year, have gotten used to the idea that a bankruptcy as an indicator of economic failure is a way of life, and the alley to the promises of fresh economic start a -- people law -- law promises a fresh economic start,
and the law allows them to start fresh and get access to credit and rehabilitate their economic future. companies do it, cities and towns and counties into its -- and counties do it. people are aware of bankruptcy as an option. they know there is life after bankruptcy. host: we have at scene stories of having a home in las vegas and california, and you walk away from the mortgage, you just cannot afford it did not bankruptcy, but walking away from the debt obligation. what right to the individuals have and what rights to the lenders have? guest: in most states, california especially, are non- recourse states. the person walking away from the mortgage is not liable for any deficiency in terms of repayment of the mortgage
balance. that is where the walkaway phenomenon, as you describe it, has become most acute. it is also a problem in other states. in nevada, some 70% of the homes are under water or near under water, meaning that the individuals owe more on the home that is valued. nevada is the no. 1 in per capita bankruptcy filings. again, because of the bursting of the housing bubble, in addition to the other economic problems. walking away is an issue. by and large, this environment, banks don't pursue individual homeowners for deficiencies. there are just too many cases to pursue. there is really no market for the halt once the bank -- host: our guest is a graduate of
syracuse university, both undergraduate and law school. pittsburgh, massachusetts, independent line. good morning. we lost sam. tony in atlanta, good morning. caller: thank you for c-span. this is my first time calling. my comment is that i had to much debt and my job started cutting back on hours and i was not able to pay all my bills on time. i had to make budget changes -- make a bunch of changes. it seems to me that i'm paying back my bankruptcy and it costs me more now to pay the debts o
ff. the loss, when the change to come actually heard it and -- sit law -- laws, when they changed it, actually hurt the consumer. guest: that experience is not atypical. the 2005 law changes, perhaps what the caller was referring to, require some individuals to have the capacity to repay more of their debts. the law authorizes them to do so through a repayment plan in chapter 13. it shifts it to chapter 15 were at a greater percentage is repaid over a period of time of three to five years. host: next caller. caller: steve, how you doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: my comment begins in
1963. we were experiencing the same kind of economic crisis is experiencing now. the imf and world bank were called in to bail america out. america began a decline in 1963. it led to the rise in all kinds of civil disobedience, and this term about "drill, baby, drill," that is a slight on the "burn, baby, burn" era of the 1960's but it led to a march on washington that shut down at washington, ran all the politicians out of washington. that led to the election of jimmy carter. that example is what the american people, especially caucasian people in america, need to wake up and find out what they need to do to get a
government-back -- they government back -- host: you need to connect the dots, because i am not sure i follow your analogy -- caller: people are in bankruptcy and they have no jobs, and now -- host: 08 jet -- go ahead. caller: well, i disagree with that. it is frustrating. thank you. how do you deal with his frustration? guest: you deal with bank failures. the fdic is on track to take over more than 100 banks this year because of the lingering economic problems. many are real estate-related and it will take a while before that worked through the system, and there can be general health
beyond the beltway. host: of the were saying that bankruptcy is almost synonymous with unpayable costs. how are we dealing with this issue? guest: it is part of the overall debt burden that individuals are facing. many hope that the health care bill will make health care more affordable and will reduce the incidences of the uninsured and medical expenses that can lead a family to seek bankruptcy protection. host: we have a link on c- span.org if you want to get more information from the american bankruptcy institute. charlene, republican line. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good. caller: in the early 2000's, i had a bankruptcy.
host: walk us through the numbers. how much were you earning, what was your debt load -- caller: well, it was against my belief to file bankruptcy, because i work for equifax. i told people to not file bankruptcy. so what i had to file it myself, it was just crushing. i had a nervous breakdown and had to go out on disability. and that was the reason that i had to file. so we finally paid out -- paid off chapter 13, caught all our ducks in a row, and things were going good, and then we both got sick. my husband is 64, i am at 58. he had triple bypass, i had a hole in my pancreas.
i went into toxic shock. they did not know if i was going to live or die. they did not do complete surgery on me because they did not think i would make it. right now i am rehabilitating said that i can have the surgery. all we have, but the bus, -- all we have, both of us, our social security checks coming in, and an astronomical amount of the bills. we are looking at are we going to have to file again, and how many years does it take before you can file again? host: again, it was 10 years ago when he filed for bankruptcy? -- when you filed for bankruptcy? caller: maybe seven. guest: typically is eight years from one family to the nnxt. it depends on when the case was converted. she mentions that she was in
chapter 13 repayment plan. as is fairly weak typical of the chapter 13 plan, a -- most -- as is fairly typical of the chapter 13 plan, most fail. host: but in that eight-year period, can you buy add house, get credit? guest: your ability to access credit will depend on your credit score and history. obviously, a bankruptcy is going to be a significant negative with respect to your ability to access affordable credit. host: and do you pay a higher rate? guest: absolutely did post- bankruptcy credit, to the extent it is available, is at a higher cost. host: debora is joining us from richmond, virginia. caller: good morning. how you all doing? the reason i'm calling is because i am wondering whether you all have thought about
extending the period of bankruptcy. it needs to be extended. when i went bankrupt, i was waiting around for my social security. i had to have an emergency operation and go out on disability. when you go out on disability, is not required -- the company's september the disability -- the companies have temporary disability did they go by b -- have a temporary disability. they don't go by what the doctors say. during bankruptcy, you have to come up with the money to the trustees, you have to keep up your monthly payments on your
house and everything. it is very, very difficult. if i had a husband like one of the previous callers, ok, school. but when you or a single woman who has been working, and i have worked almost 30 years and that was the last job that i had, and all of a sudden i had to have an emergency operation, you know, bankruptcy is not enough. host: let me take her situation and broaden it out slightly as we look at the new health-care bill that was signed into law. will that help her situation and others in her predicament? guest: well, i am not a health care expert. host: in terms of finances. guest: what the colors have been talking about our medical
expenses that they did not anticipate -- what the callers have been talking about are medical expenses that they did not anticipate. in chapter 13, that is one reason why these plans do not succeed, because things happen, and medical problems are an example of that. host: sam is joining us from pittsburgh, massachusetts. thank you for phoning again. caller: i recently -- six or seven years ago i filed bankruptcy. i went to court, the whole thing. the irs at some point in 2002 levied by -- they said i had tax lien up until 2007.
i did not make a whole lot of money, but i paid it off. this let me a letter from the irs saying that i paid my do -- they sent me a letter from the irs saying that i paid might do. how do i start building might credit -- i paid by leaned to the irs and completed what i was told i had to do at i have to start building credit again. who do i need to get a hold to get that information so that i host: sam, are you working now? caller: i am. i work at a car company for seven years, until it went bust, and then i changed and i work 40, 50 hours a week until four or five months ago. we went to two days a week, if we are lucky. host: thank you, sam. guest: the caller refers to irs
tax debts, which are not this chargeable in bankruptcy. that is an exception to the general rule we talked about, where you get a general discharge our obligations. individuals also have an obligation to correct information in the credit >> individuals of the right to -- individuals also have the right to correct information in the credit record that is inaccurate. the document should be communicated to the credit reporting agencies, who are obliged to correct the record based on the new information of the repaid debt. host: our guest is similar gerdano of the american bankruptcy institute. -- samuel gerdano of the american bankruptcy institute. milwaukee, republican line. caller: wonderful as c-span,
wonderful guest. a lot of people are going bankrupt and is going to increase. we should put the fault of all personal debt and national debt -- default on all personal debt and national debt, and get back to technology, reverse engineering. a number of years ago, in south america, there was a lot of unemployment in our country because of the modern machinery. so to get these people back to work, they stopped using the modern machinery and got the people back to work in the fields. that is the only thing that is going to save our country, reversed technology, reverse engineering. i will wait for your comment. host: did you want to respond? guest: well, having a job with
us the state income is very important to not only -- weitita sustained and tom is very important to not only staying out of bankruptcy. host: you can see a lot of for- rent signs, and many businesses either moved out or went bankrupt. if you do go back and you want to start up business in a year or two, how difficult is it to do in a year or so? guest: well, it is not easy, but it can be done. you mentioned a strip malls, and larger businesses, hotels, office buildings, which need to be refinanced periodically have trouble accessing credit in the tighter credit markets.
we see a rise in bankruptcies on the commercial side as well. a lot depends on the ability to access credit markets. credit has been restricted over the last couple of years. until that frees up, it will be harder, particularly for small businesses, to have capital to start up a new enterprise. host: next is sharon from evanston, illinois, outside of chicago. democrats' line. good morning. caller: i recently filed for chapter 13, and i am still having problems, because my mortgage company refuses to give me a loan modification. guest: yes, well, actually, this is a great time for this call. today, as a matter of fact, june 1, a new treasury department
rule goes into effect which requires mortgage lenders and servicers to expand the enhanced protection, the home affordable mortgage program, to individuals who are in chapter 13. formerly, the ability to expand coverage was discretionary. to often a lenders did not extend the program to those who are in bankruptcy. but now, june 1, the program is mandatory, and that allows the individual to essentially right- size their income for their mortgage to 31% of their growth income. it will allow the individual to scale down when they go on the mortgage down to the 31% figure and paid out over a period of time.
again, this is day one of the program. we don't yet know how effective it will be until this point, the government programs have been largely ineffective in terms of helping people stay in comes, where they are facing -- stay in where they are facing -- stay in homes, where they are facing is under water situation. host: chapter 7, chapter 13, what is the difference? guest: their work places where they had to repay debts over time, and -- there were times where they had to be paid debts over time, and things happened that causes of modification of the plan or conversion into chapter 7, or the -- where the unsecured debts are extinguished. host: in a hypothetical, let's say your annual monthly take-
home pay is $5,000, and your mortgage and your expenses and your credit cards is $7,000 or $8,000. if you have overextend yourself, can you go back to your creditor and say i want to make a payment that stretched out to 40 years, or refinance and come up with a different payment plan to avoid bankruptcy? what do you do? guest: you can attempt to talk to your creditors. that is always the first step that people should exhaust. this environment has not been terribly hospitable for those kinds of offers, but as i just mentioned, the new government program, which allows people to write down the amount they owed to some that is more consistent with their income stream, might allow them to at least get their mortgage payment down to something that is affordable.
if they have other debt they cannot deal with, the chapter 13 process might help as well, because it might allow the debtor to commit their disposable income to repay a portion of those debts, and the court will then restructure their debts as part of at the chapter 13 plan. host: emily is joining us on the democrats' line from louisiana. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. we had to file chapter 13 of while back. three heart surgeries that were unforeseen. i am nervous. 13 as opposed to seven. we did not know anything about bankruptcy. and then we get the plan because we did not want to lose our home. home. and we finished out the plan. as
opposed to chapter 7, while we were struggling to make ends meet at this time, and we just finished plan out and be repaid our debts and our trusty and everything -- i'm sorry, i am very nervous -- i see other people that had filed a chapter 7, and they were getting credit like quitting new cars and such -- getting new cars and such. i don't understand that. can you shed light on that for me? thank you so much for taking my call. host: is there disparity? guest: there can be. there are 1.7 million cases, so there are lots of different stories out there. in anticipation of the plan of a filing for bankruptcy, if you
have, for example, a credit card, and are able to pay eight off so that you -- pay it off so that you owe nothing to that particular creditor, have to wrap the creditor in the case if you do not with them a debt, because they are not a creditor. with what credit line like that, the individual can -- one could live like that, the individual can rehabilitate themselves and get back to other credit. that is one way to rehabilitate one's economic future. another scenario is where some creditors will look at someone who has recently been through a chapter 7 bankruptcy and is discharged -- has discharged all of their unsecured debt, but still has a job, and income
testing, and they may be viewed as a better credit risk than someone struggling to complete the plan, because they view the job as a source to pay their new-buy the new -- the new debt by the new credit extension. an individual who is discharged through a chapter 7 has better access to credit than someone who has struggled mightily to complete the chapter 13 plan. there are cases like that. it is a function of the credit markets, not federal law. host: miami, independent line. caller: it has come to my attention that there seems to be a systematic campaign towards making people go into bankruptcy by the media and by this current admiiistration. that is the enemy of capitalism.
a lot of people go into bankruptcy, and eventually, they will bring this country down. there seems to be a promotion for people to just give up on their obligations. i want you guys to comment on that. host: is it giving obligations? gue -- giving up on obligations? guest: that goes back to what we were talking about earlier about whether there is a stigma to filing bankruptcy. much like all the colors we have had this morning, people are not happy about being in bankruptcy. you sense of deep regret and frustration in their voices. no one wants to be in bankruptcy. i don't think it is the government's policy, either, to encourage bankruptcy, but for 200 years, bankruptcy has been aaailable as a safety net for
individuals who just cannot meet their debt obligations. it is in the constitution, article 1, section 8. it has been part of our legal system right from the beginning. host: ohio, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i own my own company, i do very well. what i was 24 years old, i had a lot of extra money, and i invested in a real-estate venture that completely cleaned my clock. i lost everything. host: how much did you lose? caller: i lost over four harder thousand dollars in his real- estate scam -- $400,000 in this real-estate scampered but i have managed to save my business and keep my business going and things are going good, even though the economy is pretty rough.
i went from a 780 credit's core -- credit score, and i am down to 490, and it has crippled my business. i cannot grow, i cannot get accounts -- i pay my bills that i have now read i do not know what my best bet is. what i be able to keep the equipment that i still have loans on and make the payments on a monthly basis? host: what is your business and is their cash flow to the business right now? caller: 0, certainly. we are a supply co., a commercial and residential business. but i need more equipment, i need to grow, i need to set up accounts and operate -- a lot of my payment terms are 30, 45
days. no line of credit or anything. i always had that, and it is gone. guest: rehabilitating a credit's core can be difficult, -- rehabilitating a credit score can be difficult, particularly after an economic downturn. the credit markets are restricted, which makes it difficult for this caller and others to act as affordable credit at terms that are commercially -- to access to affordable credit at terms that are commercially accessible. host: will we see more bankruptcies in the year ahead? guest: absolutely. we're projecting 1.7 million filings for individuals and businesses this year. that would be the highest number, and understanding the spike year of 2005.